Google is getting concerned about Samsung’s dominance in the Android handset scene, according to a report Monday from the Wall Street Journal. Google is allegedly meeting with other companies to work together and help them become more competitive against the runaway Samsung. Samsung currently owns Android phone sales in nearly every important metric, including unit shipments and profitability.

The WSJ noted that Google’s senior VP of mobile and digital content, Andy Rubin, stated last fall that Google and Samsung’s union had obviously been fruitful, but the company could become a concern if it gained much more footing in sales. Google’s specific concern, according to the WSJ, is that Samsung “has become so big… that it could flex its muscle to renegotiate their arrangement and eat into Google’s lucrative mobile ad business.”

A renegotiation could also afford Samsung perks like earlier access to new versions of Android. It could give Samsung more weight to throw around in creating partnership devices with Google, such that it doesn't feel the need to compromise and then later one-up itself, as happened with the Galaxy Nexus and then Galaxy S III.

Samsung has the largest market share in the smartphone scene, with 32 percent in the third quarter of 2012 to Apple’s 15.5 percent. Samsung’s shipments dwarf all others’, with 55.5 million phones shipped in the same quarter to Apple’s 26.9 million.

Samsung doesn’t seem shy about pulling away from Google, either. The company has plans to release a handful of phones running the Tizen OS in 2013 in the East and may bring them around to the West if they’re a hit.

Promoted Comments

Samsung currently owns Android phone sales in nearly every important parameter, including unit shipments and profitability.

That's what happens when you have an open market and let companies compete on the merits. Some rise, others fall.

Not sure why Google is concerned -- as long as it's an Android sale, and not a iPhone sale then Google should be happy.

For now, they are happy. Looking to the future, however, what Google doesn't want is for Samsung to become *the* Android phone manufacturer and have a stranglehold on the Android market and thus Google's nuts in a vice.

10 posts | registered Dec 11, 2012

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

149 Reader Comments

Better competition on the android side of things would be better for consumers. But I still feel carriers are a big part of the problem. As long as there are many versions of very similar hardware where each carrier puts their own crapware on the phone, its going to be hard for those phone makers to compete.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Better competition on the android side of things would be better for consumers. But I still feel carriers are a big part of the problem. As long as there are many versions of very similar hardware where each carrier puts their own crapware on the phone, its going to be hard for those phone makers to compete.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Samsung and Apple are the only profitable mobile phone makers, right? It seems like the same issues all the PC makers are having these days - it's just a big race to the bottom and most of the players make no money.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

The computer world today, and especially the phone world is really dominated by software - software matters, hardware is the commodity. Phones are literally a small screen and a couple buttons and they all run one of a few different processors. There are few ways for companies to differentiate, yet somehow Sansung has.

However the facts remain, hardware still matters very little, with some help Google should be able to prop up (or provide via motorolla) some significant competition. Samsung may be powerful today but that can shift quickly.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

We live in this small insignificant country called the Unites States, where people are beholden to rich companies who hold sway on the politicians and are not motivated by regulation to do good by consumers.

Samsung currently owns Android phone sales in nearly every important parameter, including unit shipments and profitability.

That's what happens when you have an open market and let companies compete on the merits. Some rise, others fall.

Not sure why Google is concerned -- as long as it's an Android sale, and not a iPhone sale then Google should be happy.

For now, they are happy. Looking to the future, however, what Google doesn't want is for Samsung to become *the* Android phone manufacturer and have a stranglehold on the Android market and thus Google's nuts in a vice.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

Here in the US if you buy a phone from a carrier (with contract or flat out purchase), its their version of the phone. So if you want a phone on Verizon, it will have their version of the OS with their software running on it.

Although people can go with like a Nexus 4 which has pure android on it and zero crapware.

It appears to me that Samsung and Google are entirely confused if there is any doubt as to why people buy Samsung phones. Its Android. Its not because they're in love with Samsung. Its because of Android. That is the singular reason. Why don't they buy HTC or Motorola phones? Advertising. If Samsung thinks it can make a high end device based on Tizen or Bada, or anything else, that would be a mistake of New Coke proportions. Apple, HTC, and Motorola are praying (!) for Samsung to overplay their hand.

Samsung currently owns Android phone sales in nearly every important parameter, including unit shipments and profitability.

That's what happens when you have an open market and let companies compete on the merits. Some rise, others fall.

Not sure why Google is concerned -- as long as it's an Android sale, and not a iPhone sale then Google should be happy.

Google is concerned that Samsung may start to use that dominance in steering Android more their way or another article mentioned that another concern would be if Samsung forked away with their own version of Android under the own control.

As the post above me aptly put it, I don't mind Samsung's position as long as they're doing it right. I dislike the fact Google don't support expandable memory and that the Nexus 4 has its battery glued into the chassis to prevent it being replaced. For now, Samsung are supporting both easily removable batteries and expandable storage which are two big pluses to me amongst other features.

That said I do wonder if Google do have that much to worry about because fortunes can very quickly change in the mobile world, it doesn't seem that long ago HTC were THE Android manufacturer yet now they're announcing huge losses and dropped down the charts. I guess a many of those that buy Samsung phones probably haven't even heard of Touchwiz never mind know what it is but then there's plenty that do and find it irritating, a big downside over the vanilla Android skin. If Samsung try to push further with that they may find that support dwindles and pushes people back to more standard versions of Android.

It appears to me that Samsung and Google are entirely confused if there is any doubt as to why people buy Samsung phones. Its Android. Its not because they're in love with Samsung. Its because of Android. That is the singular reason. Why don't they buy HTC or Motorola phones? Advertising. If Samsung thinks it can make a high end device based on Tizen or Bada, or anything else, that would be a mistake of New Coke proportions. Apple, HTC, and Motorola are praying (!) for Samsung to overplay their hand.

I think you are mistaken and contradict yourself. People are not buying samsung because of android. They are doing so because they want a galaxy. Samsung is rapidly approaching the point where they can heavily skin android (a la amazon) and the average consumer many not even know or care.

It appears to me that Samsung and Google are entirely confused if there is any doubt as to why people buy Samsung phones. Its Android. Its not because they're in love with Samsung. Its because of Android. That is the singular reason.

I have a Samsung phone but it was one of many Android phones I had to choose from. Yes, I've decided that Android is the best mobile OS for me at the moment and that was the first step in the decision process.

Still, that narrows the field by only a little bit. Out of the Android handsets available, a smaller subset are compatible with my carrier. Narrow down some more. Out of the Android handsets compatible with my carrier, I then had a choice between several models from a few manufacturers. Why did I choose the Samsung handset?

I found it to have the best combo of hardware and software out of the Android phones available for my carrier at the time. I could have purchased an HTC or an LG or something else if Android was the only requirement.

Not saying that "Samsung is teh best!!" or anything. I just think that people do choose based on handset as well as OS so for better or worse, companies sink or swim based on what they offer.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

Here in the US if you buy a phone from a carrier (with contract or flat out purchase), its their version of the phone. So if you want a phone on Verizon, it will have their version of the OS with their software running on it.

Although people can go with like a Nexus 4 which has pure android on it and zero crapware.

Not to beat a dead horse, but you could buy either an iPhone or a Windows Phone 8 device, and have zero crapware on your phone. That was one of the driving forces in my decision to move away from Android. A decision I'm increasingly thankful I made early in my smartphone owning life.

There are few ways for companies to differentiate, yet somehow Sansung has.

How have they? I always assumed it was branding...people like and trust their brand...much as people like and trust Apples brand.

For me at least the only reason I went with Samsung this time is because of the S-Pen on the Note II. I've been waiting 5 years for another phone with a functional, accurate, and pressure sensitive stylus. Ever since everyone decided to copy Apple and their capacitive screen phones there hasn't been a good portable stylus device after the tail off of pre-iphone devices.

Anyways I think Google realized its mistake of getting into hardware themselves with Motorola. Nobody wants it because Google isn't willing to go all out on it. Because if they do they'll just push the competition away from Android.

I think google also found out what happens with you opensource something extremely powerful with no real model to make money off it to a corporation that sells products for a profit. They make a profit and run. Yes they might snuff out the competition. But a more interesting play from Samsung would be to open up an app store. Amazon has an app store. What would happen if Samsung opened up their own. It would be quite funny.

I think this is the reason why Microsoft didn't listen to the critics on making their own phone. Its not going to strengthen their eco system by competing with the people you are trying to get to use your platform. Not to mention they can sue to get Android royalties from any large player.

Not sure why Google is concerned -- as long as it's an Android sale, and not a iPhone sale then Google should be happy.

Two possible bad Google outcomes:

1) The Samsung brand becomes much more important to consumers than Android, Samsung deftly transitions their phones to a different OS without consumers really caring, as long as they're getting their new Samsung phone.

2) Samsung decides to "Amazon" their phones, stripping any and all links to the ways that Google monetizes Android phones, while still using the Android OS. That's probably even worse than the first one, since then Google is providing its OS for free, and creating a huge money sink for themselves.

I wonder if the Google people are starting to wonder if they're the IBM to Samsung's Microsoft.

You take those services away, you have to replace them with something. Samsung's own software has been incredibly lacking, and I don't think they're prepared to replace even half of those apps, much less all of them.

Just look at Apple. They removed YouTube and Google Maps from the OS, and they had outrageous flak from it. Apple Maps was (and still is) a joke.

Or take a look at Kindle Fire tablets. Despite having a store populated with many games and a few apps of their own, they still lose on all the Google services, and it shows. They can't shake their identity as just an eReader, because that's the only thing they're useful for.

What's worse, is if Samsung strongarms Google, it won't be like on iOS. You won't be able to just grab the YouTube or Maps app from the store. Samsung will have to create its own app store, populate it with its own replacement apps, and do a good job at it as well. Samsung's done pretty well with themselves in the hardware department, but anyone who has used Samsung's devices knows their software is... lacking.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

Here in the US if you buy a phone from a carrier (with contract or flat out purchase), its their version of the phone. So if you want a phone on Verizon, it will have their version of the OS with their software running on it.

Although people can go with like a Nexus 4 which has pure android on it and zero crapware.

Not to beat a dead horse, but you could buy either an iPhone or a Windows Phone 8 device, and have zero crapware on your phone. That was one of the driving forces in my decision to move away from Android. A decision I'm increasingly thankful I made early in my smartphone owning life.

I don't have much experience with WP8, but there is definitely some non-removable crapware on ios devices. My mom got an iphone 5 and spent half a day trying to figure out how to get rid of half the apps on the first page before I confirmed for her that she doesn't have that option.

My experience is primarily with WP8, but I have pretty extensive experience with iPhones, too, and have never seen any preloaded or uninstallable apps from either Verizon or AT&T. I believe doing so was expressly forbidden by Apple. But it's possible something has changed. Maybe someone else can weigh in?

Hmm I see the point here but I wish we could focus on what Samsung is doing right and try to replicate it with the other manufacturers. They certainly don't have the best hardware. Marketing is a strong suit. Also their added layers of UI are clearly appealing to the consumer. Note to Google: force all manufacturers to release stock Nexus phones. If there is an issue with stock Android - address it. I understand we can't all have unlocked bootloaders but we don't all need someone else's opinion of what our homescreen and interface should look like.

I don't have much experience with WP8, but there is definitely some non-removable crapware on ios devices. My mom got an iphone 5 and spent half a day trying to figure out how to get rid of half the apps on the first page before I confirmed for her that she doesn't have that option.

Larger makers like Apple and Samsung have leverage on the carriers. There is zero crapware on iPhones, and little if any on the Galaxy S series phones as I recall. But you go to some others and there is a lot of stuff running on them in the background which hurts the performance and battery life of the phone.

Where I come from user have leverage on the carriers, and there is zero crapware on phones. When you are paying or partially paying for a phone why would you buy one loaded with crap?

Here in the US if you buy a phone from a carrier (with contract or flat out purchase), its their version of the phone. So if you want a phone on Verizon, it will have their version of the OS with their software running on it.

Although people can go with like a Nexus 4 which has pure android on it and zero crapware.

Not to beat a dead horse, but you could buy either an iPhone or a Windows Phone 8 device, and have zero crapware on your phone. That was one of the driving forces in my decision to move away from Android. A decision I'm increasingly thankful I made early in my smartphone owning life.

I don't have much experience with WP8, but there is definitely some non-removable crapware on ios devices. My mom got an iphone 5 and spent half a day trying to figure out how to get rid of half the apps on the first page before I confirmed for her that she doesn't have that option.

Pre-Loaded software and crapware are different though. Trying to delete Compass that only runs when you want it to is not the same as trying to remove a background service that is running all the time on a Verizon android phone.

You take those services away, you have to replace them with something. Samsung's own software has been incredibly lacking, and I don't think they're prepared to replace even half of those apps, much less all of them.

Just look at Apple. They removed YouTube and Google Maps from the OS, and they had outrageous flak from it. Apple Maps was (and still is) a joke.

Or take a look at Kindle Fire tablets. Despite having a store populated with many games and a few apps of their own, they still lose on all the Google services, and it shows. They can't shake their identity as just an eReader, because that's the only thing they're useful for.

What's worse, is if Samsung strongarms Google, it won't be like on iOS. You won't be able to just grab the YouTube or Maps app from the store. Samsung will have to create its own app store, populate it with its own replacement apps, and do a good job at it as well. Samsung's done pretty well with themselves in the hardware department, but anyone who has used Samsung's devices knows their software is... lacking.

You're missing a very significant point: Apple removed YouTube and Google Maps from iOS and Google built their own apps for iOS. Nobody knows how many people would leave Samsung over a move to Tizen. We would have to wait and see if Samsung could make Tizen into an iOS/Android competitor where Google makes native apps, or if it would backfire and turn into WP8 where Google ignores you. You jump to the conclusion that Google would ignore Samsung, which may not be a good business move for Google.

You take those services away, you have to replace them with something. Samsung's own software has been incredibly lacking, and I don't think they're prepared to replace even half of those apps, much less all of them.

Just look at Apple. They removed YouTube and Google Maps from the OS, and they had outrageous flak from it. Apple Maps was (and still is) a joke.

Or take a look at Kindle Fire tablets. Despite having a store populated with many games and a few apps of their own, they still lose on all the Google services, and it shows. They can't shake their identity as just an eReader, because that's the only thing they're useful for.

What's worse, is if Samsung strongarms Google, it won't be like on iOS. You won't be able to just grab the YouTube or Maps app from the store. Samsung will have to create its own app store, populate it with its own replacement apps, and do a good job at it as well. Samsung's done pretty well with themselves in the hardware department, but anyone who has used Samsung's devices knows their software is... lacking.

You're missing a very significant point: Apple removed YouTube and Google Maps from iOS and Google built their own apps for iOS. Nobody knows how many people would leave Samsung over a move to Tizen. We would have to wait and see if Samsung could make Tizen into an iOS/Android competitor where Google makes native apps, or if it would backfire and turn into WP8 where Google ignores you.

Not to mention you can still install Google Maps and Google's YouTube app (the YouTube app in the store came before the stock app was removed).

Hmm I see the point here but I wish we could focus on what Samsung is doing right and try to replicate it with the other manufacturers. They certainly don't have the best hardware. Marketing is a strong suit. Also their added layers of UI are clearly appealing to the consumer. Note to Google: force all manufacturers to release stock Nexus phones. If there is an issue with stock Android - address it. I understand we can't all have unlocked bootloaders but we don't all need someone else's opinion of what our homescreen and interface should look like.

I disagree about the hardware - they tend to offer in or around the best hardware particularly their screens which seem to be one of the main appeals of their devices. The reason I bought a Samsung (the Note) was because it had the best hardware at the time, no-one offered anything near the 5.3in screen the Note had at the time, nor a stylus and fewer devices offer a removable battery and expandable storage. The processor, camera and ram were all pretty much the best there was at the time of release.

Similarly the S3 is obviously one of the most popular Samsung handsets and at its release most of its hardware was the best you could get or at least as good as the best of other manufacturers.

Samsung currently owns Android phone sales in nearly every important parameter, including unit shipments and profitability.

That's what happens when you have an open market and let companies compete on the merits. Some rise, others fall.

Not sure why Google is concerned -- as long as it's an Android sale, and not a iPhone sale then Google should be happy.

Because if Samsung is the only player in the Android market, then Google loses control of the operating system (it's open source, Samsung can do whatever they want with it).

Maybe Samsung will decide that the real money is in services, and they'll buy Garmin or Tomtom and make their own mapping software. Maybe they'll worked on a GoogleNow/Siri-like service. Maybe they'll start getting into search for the ad revenue.

The point of Android was (in a demonstration of brilliant foresight) to make Google relevant and profiting in a landscape which was shifting towards mobile computing. If Samsung == Android, then Google is fully dependant on Samsung for that... and maybe Samsung has its eye on Google's profts and wants in on that action.

That might not be the case at all, but Google probably doesn't want to wait around to see how this all unfolds.